ORDER : Respondents vide e-tender notice dated 22.07.2021, invited tenders from the registered firms or any legal entities for providing sanitation services at Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru Govt. Medical College and Hosptial, Chamba. Copy of relevant extract of e-tender notice dated 22.07.2021 along with requisite tender document stands placed on record as Annexure P-1. After submission of tender by various participants including petitioner, respondents issued corrigendum dated 07.08.2021, whereby condition with regard to minimum annual turnover came to be enhanced from Rs. 30 lacs per year to Rs. 1 Crore 50 lacs, Annexure P-2. Though, respondents after being asked by petitioner for clarification, issued clarification dated 16.08.2021 with regard to turn over, but cancelled the earlier tender process initiated vide e-tender notice dated d22.07.2021 and again invited tenders vide e-tender notice dated 04.01.2022 qua the same work at the same Institution, Annexure P-4. Vide corrigendum dated 10.01.2022, respondents again changed the condition of turnover and enhanced the minimum turnover from Rs.1.5 Crore to Rs.5 Crore in each year, Annexure P-5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid change made in the tender condition by way of corrigendum, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein following substantive relief:- “1 That the tender process initiated by the respondents vide tender inviting notice dated 04.01.2022, corrigendum dated 04.01.2022 contained in Annexure P-4 and corrigendum dated 10.01.2022 contained in Annexure P-5, whereby the annual turnover certificate for last three years having minimum turnover of Rs.5 crore in each is required may kindly be quashed and set aside by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari.” 2. Mr. Ajay Vaidya, learned Senior Additional Advocate General has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. While inviting attention of this Court to judgment dated 06.02.2019, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 424 of 2019, titled M/s Rakesh Kumar and another vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, Mr. Vaidya, contended that issue sought to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated and as such, present petition deserves dismissal out rightly. 3. Mr. Vaidya, contended that issue sought to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated and as such, present petition deserves dismissal out rightly. 3. Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, learned counsel representing the petitioner while making this Court to peruse the documents placed on record along with the petition, strenuously argued that repeatedly tender conditions came to be changed by respondents with a view to give undue advantage to their favourites. He argued that otherwise also condition of Rs.5 Crore of turnover in each year could not have been made in tender document by respondents because in that eventuality, none of the local person from the State of Himachal Pradesh would be able to participate in tender. He argued that respondents with a view to oust the petitioner from participating in the tender process has made unilateral change in the turn over condition, which otherwise at the time of issuance of e-tender notice dated 22.07.2021, was Rs.30 lac per year and thereafter was enhanced to Rs.1 Crore 50 lacs. While inviting attention of this Court to representation, Annexure P-8, Mr. Vashista, contended that representation having been filed by the petitioner in terms of order dated 19.04.2022, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 505/2022 is being not decided by the respondents. 4. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record, especially, corrigendum dated 10.01.2022, Annexure P-5, whereby condition with regard to minimum turnover came to be changed from Rs.1.5 Crore to Rs.5 Crore, this Court finds no illegality and infirmity in the action of respondents, who otherwise are fully competent to change the tender conditions prior to submission of bid. It has been repeatedly held by Hon’ble Apex Court as well as this Court in catena of cases that it is prerogative of the department inviting tender to incorporate tender conditions in the tender document according to their requirement and suitability. No doubt, tender conditions, if any, contained in tender document being totally contrary to the basic formalities and rules occupying the field can be interfered by Constitutional Courts while exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but in that eventuality, person laying challenge to the conditions is under obligation to prove that same have been changed with a view to oust him/her and to give undue favour to some person, who is otherwise not eligible. 5. 5. No doubt, in the case at hand, on two occasions, condition with regard to minimum turnover came to be changed, but before submission of bids by the tenderers including petitioner. Though record reveals that pursuant to e-tender dated 22.07.2021, some of the tenderers including petitioner had submitted the tender documents, but before same could be finalized, department issued corrigendum changing thereby condition with regard to minimum annual turnover from Rs. 30 lac per year to Rs.1 Crore 50 lacs. Since some of the tenderers including petitioner sought clarification, department after having issued clarification dared 16.08.2021, abandoned the earlier tender and again invited tender vide e-tender notice dated 04.01.2022. 6. Leaving everything aside, issue with regard to competence of department increasing the average turnover of last three financial years to Rs. 500 lacs already has been adjudicated by Division Bench of this Court in M/s Rakesh Kumar’s case supra. In the aforesaid judgment, Division Bench of this Court while dealing with the similar situation have held that mere factum that petitioner has become ineligible to give bid on account of change in the condition of minimum turn over would not render these conditions per se illegal and arbitrary, more so when such conditions are prescribed in public interest and to ensure best facilities and care to the indoor patients. Relevant paras of the aforesaid judgment are reproduced as under:- “4. Keeping in view the present and estimated capacity of the indoor facilities in Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri Government Medical College and Hospital, Mandi at Nerchowk, District Mandi, the eligibility conditions prescribed for a bidder in the Tender Document per se cannot be held to be arbitrary. 5. For the sake of clarity, it may be mentioned that the following are the conditions prescribed in the Tender Document Annexure P3: “2. ELIGIBILITY OF BIDDER (ESSENTIAL CONDITIONS) The following shall be the minimum eligibility criteria for selection of bidders technically: a. Legal Valid Entity: The Bidder shall necessarily be a legally valid entity either in the form of a Limited Company or a Private Limited Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 or a Proprietorship firm/Partnership firm Registered under Indian Partnership Act 1932. A proof for supporting the legal validity of the Bidder shall be submitted. A proof for supporting the legal validity of the Bidder shall be submitted. b. Registration: The Bidder should be registered with the Income Tax and also registered under the labour laws, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Employees State Insurance Corporation and Goods & Services Tax. c. Clearance: The Bidder should also have clearance from GST Department, FSSAI, EPFO and Income Tax Department. Relevant proof in support shall be submitted. d. Incorporation: The Bidder Firm/Company should be in existence for more than 7 years as on the date of floating of this tender. e. Experience: The Bidder should have experience in the field of providing Cooked Diet Services to the indoor patients in minimum 500 bedded Hospital/Medical College for the last five consecutive years. f. Turnover: The average Turnover of the last three Financial Years should be more than 500 Lac.” 6. The fact that the petitioners do not have an average turnover of 500 Lacs for the last three Financial Years or that they do not have an experience of providing Cooked Diet Services to the indoor patients in a minimum 500 bedded Hospital for the last five consecutive years and consequently, they are ineligible to give bid for Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri Government Medical College and Hospital, Mandi at Nerchowk, District Mandi, would not render these conditions per se illegal and arbitrary, more so when such conditions are prescribed in public interest and to ensure best facilities and care to the indoor patients.” 7. Honble Apex Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and Another vs. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth and Others and Alpana Vs. Mehta vs. Maharashtra State Board of Secondary Education and Another (1984) 4 SCC 27 , has held that it is the domain of the Department to prescribe conditions, factors and guidelines while inviting applications. 8. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made hereinabove as well as law taking into consideration, we do not find any merit in the present petition and accordingly, no interference is called for. 8. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made hereinabove as well as law taking into consideration, we do not find any merit in the present petition and accordingly, no interference is called for. However, having taken note of the fact that representation having been filed by the petitioner pursuant to directions contained in order dated 19.04.2022, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 505/2022, has been not decided till date by the respondents, we dispose of this petition with the direction to respondent No.2/Director Health Services, Himachal Pradesh to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, Annexure P-8, expeditiously, preferably within a period of one week. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful, in terms of the instant order, afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereupon. Though, it is the clear-cut domain and prerogative of the department to prescribe condition, if any, with regard to minimum turnover, but this Court hopes and trust that while considering the representation of the petitioner, department would also take into consideration income expected to be generated by the participant in the tender in question. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.